 |
The Teaching, Capacity, Time, and Country
Nichiren, the Shramana of Japan
With regard to the first item, the teaching
consists of all the sutras, rules of monastic discipline and
treatises expounded by Shakyamuni Buddha, comprising 5,048
volumes contained in 480 scroll cases. These teachings, after
circulating throughout India for a thousand years, were introduced
to China 1,015 years after the Buddha's passing. During the
664-year period beginning with the tenth year of the Yung-p'ing
era, the year with the cyclical sign hinoto-u (A.D.
67), in the reign of Emperor Ming of the Later Han, and ending
with the eighteenth year of the K'ai-yuan era, the year with
the cyclical sign kanoe-uma (A.D. 730), in the reign
of Emperor Hsuan-tsung of the T'ang, all of these teachings
were introduced to China.
The contents of these sutras, rules of monastic
discipline and treatises can be divided into the categories
of Hinayana and Mahayana teachings, provisional and true sutras,
and exoteric and esoteric sutras, and one should carefully
distinguish between them. Such designations did not originate
with the later scholars and teachers of Buddhism, but derive
from the preaching of the Buddha himself. Therefore they must
be used without exception by all the people of the worlds
of the ten directions, and anyone who fails to do so should
be regarded as non-Buddhist.
The custom of referring to the teachings of
the Agon sutras as Hinayana derives from the various
Mahayana sutras such as the Hodo, Hannya, Lotus
and Nirvana sutras. In the Lotus Sutra the Buddha says that
had he preached only the Hinayana teachings without preaching
the Lotus Sutra, he would have been guilty of concealing the
truth. Moreover, the Nirvana Sutra states that those who accept
only the Hinayana sutras, declaring that the Buddha is characterized
by impermanence, will have their tongues fester in their mouths.
Second is the matter of capacity. Anyone who
attempts to propagate the teachings of Buddhism must understand
the capacity and basic nature of the persons he is addressing.
The Venerable Shariputra attempted to instruct a blacksmith
by teaching him to meditate on the vileness of the body, and
to instruct a washerman by teaching him to count his breaths
in meditation. Even though he spent over ninety days with
them, these pupils of his did not gain the slightest understanding
of the Buddha's Law. On the contrary, they took on erroneous
views and ended by becoming icchantika or persons of
incorrigible disbelief.
The Buddha, on the other hand, instructed
the blacksmith in the counting-of-breath meditation, and the
washer of clothes in the meditation on the vileness of the
body, and as a result both were able to obtain understanding
in no time at all. If even Shariputra, who was counted foremost
in wisdom among the major disciples of the Buddha, failed
in understanding the capacity of the persons he was instructing,
then how much more difficult must it be for ordinary teachers
in this, the Latter Day of the Law, to have such an understanding!
Ordinary teachers who lack an understanding of capacity should
teach only the Lotus Sutra to those who are under their instruction.
Question: What about the passage in the Lotus
Sutra that says one should not preach this sutra among the
ignorant?
Answer: When I speak of understanding capacity,
I am referring to the preaching of the Law done by a man of
wisdom. Yet, [even though one understands the capacity of
one's listeners,] one should preach only the Lotus Sutra to
those who slander the Law, so that they may establish a so-called
"poison-drum relationship" with it. In this respect,
one should proceed as Bodhisattva Fukyo did.
However, if one is speaking to persons who
one knows have the capacity to become wise, then one should
first give them instruction in Hinayana teachings, then introduce
them to the provisional Mahayana teachings, and finally instruct
them in the true Mahayana. But if one knows that one is dealing
with ignorant persons of lesser capacity, then one should
first give them instruction in the true Mahayana teaching.
In that way, whether they choose to believe in the teaching
or to slander it, they will still receive the seed of enlightenment.
Third is the consideration of time. Anyone
who hopes to spread the Buddhist teachings must make certain
that he understands the time. For example, if a farmer should
plant his fields in autumn and winter, then, even though the
seed and the land and the farmer's efforts were the same as
ever, this planting would not result in the slightest gain
but rather would end in loss. If the farmer planted one small
plot in that way, he would suffer a minor loss, and if he
planted acres and acres, he would suffer a major loss. But
if he plows and plants in the spring and summer, then, whether
the fields are of superior, medium or inferior quality, each
will bring forth its corresponding share of crops.
The preaching of the Buddhist Law is similar
to this. If one propagates the Law without understanding the
time, one will reap no benefit but on the contrary will fall
into the evil paths of existence. When Shakyamuni Buddha made
his appearance in this world, he was determined to preach
the Lotus Sutra. But though the capacities of his listeners
may have been right, the proper time had not yet come. Therefore
he spent a period of more than forty years without preaching
the Lotus Sutra, explaining, as he says in the Lotus Sutra
itself, that this was "because the time to expound it
had not yet come."
The day after the Buddha's passing begins
the thousand-year period known as the Former Day of the Law,
when those who uphold the precepts are many while those who
break them are few. The day after the end of the Former Day
of the Law marks the beginning of the thousand-year period
known as the Middle Day of the Law, when those who break the
precepts are many while those without precepts are few. And
the day after the ending of the Middle Day of the Law begins
the ten-thousand-year period known as the Latter Day of the
Law, when those who break the precepts are few whole those
without precepts are many.
During the Former Day of the Law, one should
cast aside those who break the precepts or who have no precepts
at all, giving alms only to those who uphold the precepts.
During the Middle Day of the Law, one should cast aside those
without precepts and give alms only to those who break them.
And during the Latter Day of the Law, one should give alms
to those without precepts, treating them in the same way as
if they were the Buddha.
However, whether in the Former, the Middle
or the Latter Day of the Law, one should never in any of these
three periods give alms to those who slander the Lotus Sutra,
whether they keep the precepts, break the precepts, or do
not receive them at all. If alms are given to those who slander
the Lotus Sutra, then the land in which this happens will
invariably be visited by the three calamities and seven disasters,
and the persons who give such alms will surely fall into the
great citadel of the hell of incessant suffering.
When the votary of the Lotus Sutra speaks
words of condemnation against the provisional sutras, it is
like a ruler meting out punishment to his followers, a father
punishing his sons, or a teacher, his disciples. But when
the votaries of the provisional sutras speak words of condemnation
and slander against the Lotus Sutra, it is like followers
attempting to mete out punishment to their ruler, sons attempting
to punish their father, or disciples to punish their teacher.
At present, it has been more than 210 years
since we entered the Latter Day of the Law. One should consider
very carefully whether now is the time when the provisional
sutras or the Nembutsu teachings should be propagated, or
whether it is the time when the Lotus Sutra should be spread!
Fourth is the consideration of the country.
In spreading the Buddhist teachings, one must not fail to
take into account the kind of country involved. There are
cold countries, hot countries, poor countries, rich countries,
central countries and peripheral countries, big countries
and small countries, countries wholly given over to thieving,
countries wholly given over to the killing of living creatures,
and countries known for their utter lack of filial piety.
In addition, there are countries wholly devoted to the Hinayana
teachings, countries wholly devoted to the Mahayana teachings,
and countries in which both Hinayana and Mahayana are pursued.
In the case of Japan, therefore, we must carefully consider
whether it is a country suited exclusively to Hinayana, a
country suited exclusively to Mahayana, or a country in which
both Hinayana and Mahayana should be pursued.
Fifth is the sequence of propagation. In a
country where the Buddhist teachings have never been introduced,
there of course will be no inhabitants who are familiar with
Buddhism. But in a country where Buddhism has already been
introduced, there will be inhabitants who are believers in
the Buddhist Law. Therefore one must first learn what kind
of Buddhist doctrines have already spread in a particular
country before attempting to propagate Buddhism there oneself.
If the Hinayana and provisional Mahayana teachings
have already spread, then one should by all means propagate
the true Mahayana teaching. But if the true Mahayana teaching
has already spread, then one must not propagate the Hinayana
or provisional Mahayana teachings. One throws aside rubble
and broken tiles in order to pick up gold and gems, but one
must not throw aside gold and gems in order to pick up tiles
and rubble.
If one takes the five considerations outlined
above into account when propagating the Buddhist Law, then
one can surely become a teacher to the entire nation of Japan.
To understand that the Lotus Sutra is the
king, the first among all the various sutras, is to have a
correct understanding of the teaching. Yet Fa-yun of Kuang-che-ssu
temple and Hui-kuan of Tao-ch'ang-ssu temple claimed that
the Nirvana Sutra is superior to the Lotus Sutra. Ch'eng-kuan
of Mount Ch'ing-liang and Kobo of Mount Koya claimed that
the Kegon and Dainichi sutras are superior to
the Lotus Sutra, Chi-tsang of Chia-hsiang-ssu temple and the
priest K'uei-chi of Tz'u-en-ssu temple claimed that the two
sutras known as the Hannya and the Jimmitsu
are superior to the Lotus Sutra. One man alone, the Great
Teacher Chih-che of Mount T'ien-t'ai, not only asserted that
the Lotus Sutra is superior to all the other sutras, but urged
that anyone claiming there is a sutra superior to the Lotus
should be admonished and made to see the light; he said that
if such a person persists in his false claim, his tongue will
surely fester in his mouth during his present existence, and
after his death he will fall into the Avichi Hell. One who
is able to distinguish right from wrong among all these different
opinions may be said to have a correct understanding of the
teaching.
Of all the thousand or ten thousand scholars
of the present age, surely each and every one is confused
as to this point. And if so, then there must be very few who
have a correct understanding of the teaching. IF there are
none with a correct understanding of the teaching, there will
be none to read the Lotus Sutra. And if there are none who
read the Lotus Sutra, there will be none who can act as a
teacher to the nation. If there is no one to act as a teacher
to the nation, then everyone within the nation will be confused
as to the distinctions within the body of sutras, such as
those between the Hinayana and the Mahayana, the provisional
and the true, and the exoteric and the esoteric sutras. Not
a single person will be able to escape from the sufferings
of birth and death, and in the end they will all become slanders
of the Law. Those who, because of slandering the Law, fall
into the Avichi Hell, will be more numerous than the dust
particles of the earth, while those who, by embracing the
Law, are freed from the sufferings of birth and death, will
amount to less than the quantity of soil that can be placed
on top of a fingernail. How fearful it is to contemplate!
During the four hundred or more years since
the time of Emperor Kammu, all the people in Japan have had
the capacity to attain enlightenment solely through the Lotus
Sutra. They are like those persons who for a period of eight
years listened to the preaching of the Lotus Sutra on Eagle
Peak, with capacities suited to the pure and perfect teaching.
(Confirmation of this may be found in the records of the Great
Teacher T'ien-t'ai, Crown Prince Shotoku, the Eminent Priest
Ganjin, the Great Teacher Dengyo, the Eminent Priest Annen,
and Eshin.) To understand this is to have an understanding
of the people's capacity.
Yet the Buddhist scholars of our time say
that the people of Japan all have capacities fit only for
the recitation of Amida Buddha's name, the Nembutsu. They
are like Shariputra in the incident I mentioned earlier who,
because he was misled as to the capacity of the persons under
his instruction, in the end turned them into icchantika
or persons of incorrigible disbelief.
At present in Japan, some 2,210 years after
the demise of Shakyamuni Buddha, in the last of the five five-hundred-year
periods after his death, the hour has come for the widespread
propagation of Myoho-renge-kyo. To understand this is to have
an understanding of the time.
Yet there are Buddhist scholars in Japan today
who cast aside the Lotus Sutra and instead devote themselves
exclusively to the practice of the invocation of Amida Buddha's
name. And there are others who teach the Hinayana precepts
and speak contemptuously of the high-ranking priests of Mount
Hiei, as well as those who present what they describe as a
special transmission outside the sutras, disparaging the True
Law of the Lotus Sutra. Such persons may surely be said to
misunderstand the time! They are like the monk Shoi who slandered
Bodhisattva Kikon, or the scholar Gunaprabha who behaved with
contempt toward Bodhisattva Miroku, and thus invited the terrible
sufferings of the Avichi Hell.
Japan is a country related exclusively to
the teaching of the Lotus Sutra, just as the country of Shravasti
in India was related solely to the Mahayana teachings. In
India there were countries that were wholly devoted to Hinayana
teachings, those that were wholly devoted to Mahayana teachings,
and those that were devoted to both Hinayana and Mahayana
teachings. Japan is a country that is exclusively suited to
Mahayana teachings, and among those teachings, it should be
dedicated solely to the Lotus Sutra. (The above statement
is attested to in the Yuga Ron, the writings of Seng-chao,
and the records of Crown Prince Shotoku, the Great Teacher
Dengyo, and Annen.) To understand this is to understand the
country.
Yet there are Buddhist teachers in our present
age who address the people of Japan and instruct them only
in the precepts of the Hinayana, or those who attempt to make
them all into followers of the Nembutsu. This is like "putting
rotten food in a precious vessel." (This simile of the
precious vessel is taken from the Shugo Kokkai Sho
by the Great Teacher Dengyo.)
In Japan during the 240 or more years from
the time when Buddhism was first introduced from the Korean
kingdom of Paekche in the reign of Emperor Kimmei to the reign
of Emperor Kammu, only the Hinayana and provisional Mahayana
teachings were propagated throughout the country. Though the
Lotus Sutra existed in Japan, its significance had not yet
been made clear. This was similar to the situation years before
in China, where the Lotus Sutra had existed for more than
three hundred years before its significance was clarified.
In the time of Emperor Kammu, the Great Teacher
Dengyo refuted the Hinayana and provisional Mahayana teachings
and made clear the true significance of the Lotus Sutra. From
that time on, opposing opinions ceased to prevail, and everyone
single-mindedly put faith in the Lotus Sutra. Even those scholars
of the earlier six sects of Buddhism who studied Hinayana
and Mahayana teachings such as the Kegon, Hannya, Jimmitsu
and Agon sutras regarded the Lotus Sutra as the ultimate
authority. Needless to say, this was even more so with scholars
of the Tendai and Shingon sects, and of course with the lay
believers of Buddhism who had no special knowledge of the
subject. In its relation to the Lotus Sutra, the country was
like the K'un-lun Mountains where not a single worthless stone
is to be found, or the mountain island of P'eng-lai where
no harmful potion is known.
However, during the fifty or more years since
the Kennin era (1201-03), the priests Dainichi and Kakuan
have spread the teachings of the Zen sect, casting aside all
the various sutras and postulating a doctrine that is transmitted
outside the scriptures, while Honen and Ryukan have established
the Jodo or Pure Land sect, contradicting the teachings of
the true Mahayana and setting up sects based on the provisional
teachings. They are in effect casting aside gems and gathering
stones instead, abandoning the solid earth and endeavoring
to climb up into the air. Men such as this know nothing about
the order in which the various doctrines should be propagated.
The Buddha warned of such men when he said, "Better to
encounter a mad elephant than an evil friend!"
In the Kanji chapter of the Lotus Sutra
it is recorded that, in the last five-hundred-year period
or two thousand or so years after the Buddha's passing, there
will be three types of enemies of the Lotus Sutra. Our present
age corresponds to this last five-hundred-year period. And
as I, Nichiren, ponder the truth of these words of the Buddha,
I realize that these three types of enemies are indeed a reality.
If I do not cause them to come forth, then I will not be a
true votary of the Lotus Sutra. Yet if I cause them to appear,
then I am almost certain to bring death and destruction upon
myself.
In the fourth volume of the Lotus Sutra, it
is stated, "Since hatred and jealously toward this sutra
abound even during the lifetime of the Buddha, how much worse
will it be in the world after his passing?" In the fifth
volume it says, "The people will be full of hostility,
and it will be extremely difficult to believe." The same
volume also reads, "We do not hold our own lives dear.
We value only the supreme Way." And the sixth volume
says, "Not begrudging their lives."
In the ninth volume of the Nirvana Sutra,
we read: "For example, if an envoy who is skilled in
discussion and knows how to employ clever expedients should
be sent to a foreign country to carry out a mission for his
sovereign, it is proper that he should relate the words of
his ruler without holding back any of them, even though it
may cost him his life. And a wise man should do the same in
teaching Buddhism, going out among the common run of people,
willing to give up his life, and proclaim without fail ...
the Mahayana sutras." The Great Teacher Chang-an, commenting
on the words "without holding back any of them, even
though it may cost him his life," says, "One's body
is insignificant while the Law is supreme. One should give
his life in order to propagate the Law."
When I examine these passages, I know that
if I do not call forth these three enemies of the Lotus Sutra,
then I will not be a true votary of the Lotus Sutra. Only
by making them appear can I be a true votary. And yet if I
do so, I am almost certain to lose my life. I will be like
the Venerable Aryasimha or Bodhisattva Aryadeva.
Nichiren
The tenth day of the second month
Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin,
Vol. 4, page 7.
|
